What started out as a simple dog training log has morphed and grown into a keep yourself informed about things that are having a serious negative effect on all dog owning and training. And there is still the dog training complete with pictures and video.

Thursday, July 17, 2008

I had every intention of writing some commentary about this essay and then lost the "roundtoit" I needed to get the job done. Rather than continue to let it sit in my draft file I'm going to go ahead and post it. Everyone needs to read and think about what Mr Tyler has written. The day of the benign, little, blue-haired old lady in tennis shoes collecting stray cats and being viewed as the local town cat lady has passed. All those little ladies got run out of town by the new sheriff and his name is H$U$. In town after town all across the great nation the PETA scouts are out in huge numbers looking for the next town, city, county, state for H$U$ to attack.

Make no mistake, this is an all out war and right now the side that hates animals and humans above all is winning. Read and think about what Mr. Tyler has to say on the subject and then look at your dog/cat and wonder just how much longer you are going to be allowed to keep him/her.

May you live in interesting timesMay you come to the attention of those in authorityMay you find what you are looking for

THE STRUGGLE FOR THE FUTURE OF THE DOMESTIC DOG by Anthony P. Tyler--------------------------------------------------------------With pet-related legislation on the rise, the debate regarding the ethics of animalhusbandry has reached a fever pitch.

We have witnessed the rise of an Animal Rights movement which has attaineda sizable political influence in this country. We have seen the emergence of amultimillion dollar pet industry that has firmly entrenched itself in the American economy. As is to be expected when discussing the future of "man's bestfriend," emotions run high all around the issue. With each side claiming themoral high ground, will a compromise be reached that is in the best interest ofthe domestic dog? Only time will tell.

In the mid 1980's, the Animal Rights movement was born. Their manifesto waspublished in November 1987 in "Animals Agenda"magazine. The platform wasrelatively simple, and a few of their tenets were as follows: Promote vegetarianism from a practical standpoint, outlaw commercial trapping as well as hunting for sport,end the use of animals in laboratory tests and medical research, stop the useof animals for human amusement (rodeo, circus, etc,) end the practice of factorylivestock processing, and bring about the end of the breeding of pet animals,including those of purebred pedigree.

Today, in 2008, the Animal Rights movement is alive and flourishing.Organizations such as PETA, and the HSUS have amassed massive financial "war chests" in the form of well-meaning donations from private citizens. Popular celebrities have championed their cause. Indeed, the very acronym "People For the Ethical Treatment of Animals" sounds, on the surface, quite appealing. Who doesn't want to see ethical treatment of animals? But lets scratch beneath the surface.

There have been many public outcries as of late alleging that the PETAorganization has in fact been euthanizing many thousands of perfectly healthy,adoptable animals for no apparent reason. PETA has yet to refute these claims,which would seem to lend credence to the widely held opinion that the end goalof the Animal Rights movement in general, and the PETA organization inparticular, is to bring about the end of companion animal ownership as it isknown today, or "liberating the animals from the tyranny of human ownership," ifyou will.

Celebrities who eat meat or wear fur are castigated, people who breed dogsas a hobby are portrayed as cruel greedy individuals exploiting their animalsfor a profit, and vast sums of money are thrown around backing legislationbeneficial to the overall "Animal Rights" cause.

One of the fundamental arguments of the Animal Rights movement is thatanimals are not ours to consume. That animals, as living creatures, have theright to free will. (Opponents of this position argue that because we humanshave the combination of opposable thumbs and superior cognitive skills, thatwe are, by default, the dominant species and thus have the right to consumeanimals.)

One of the most noteworthy flaws in the Animal Rights argument, is thatproponents of such are often in favor of the mandatory spay/neuter of domesticdogs and cats, which will be discussed at great length later in this piece. Itwould seemingly be difficult for someone to one the one hand, criticize the useof animals for food with the justification that the animal does not "want" to beeaten, and yet, be in favor of making an animal endure a painfulcastration/oveohysterectomy that the animal most certainly wouldnot "want," if they even had the cognitive skills to comprehend such a surgery.

However, this hypocrisy seems to be alive and well in the AnimalRights movement. As is the culprit behind most hot-button issues in today's society, it would seem that the Animal Rights movement seeks to impose their own ethics and view of what is right and wrong upon society in general. In and of itself, thisis not a bad thing- indeed, this is how the abolitionists brought about the endof human slavery in this country.

On the other side of this equation, you have the pet industry. The factis that pets are profitable, from the "womb to the tomb," that is, from thehundreds of dollars that some families spend purchasing a dog or cat, to thehigh cost of premium pet food, to the rising cost of quality veterinary care, toexpensive trips to the dog groomer, boarding care/training classes, the myriadof toys and products we buy our pets, to the $400 cremation when the pet dies,make no mistake, pets have become an industry. As is the case with livestock,any time a living being becomes a profitable entity, abuse is bound to exist.

Many of us are familiar with the term "puppy mill." This term usuallycalls to mind a facility where dogs are kept in squalor in wire crates, treatedas a source of income and nothing more, and bred over and over until they are nolonger able to reproduce, and then disposed of. Commercial breeding operationshave become big business.

To deny the existence of these cruel, inhumane entities, would beshortsighted and inaccurate. As human beings, we should be appalledthat our fellow humans are capable of such cruel treatment of another livingbeing. The reality of puppy mills elicits emotional reactions all around, andunderstandably so.

Although they undeniably give a black eye to the entire pet industry,commercial kennels and puppy mills are only a portion of said industry. Petshave become an activity in and of themselves. In addition to the huge sumAmericans spend annually on pet food and pet- related products, many Americansparticipate in organized activities with their animals such as equine dressageevents, dog sports such as agility and flyball, 4-H shows, or just socializing with other pet owners at an off-leash dog park. But for the sake of our discussion, letsfocus for a moment on dog confirmation shows. Many untold millions are spent annually on food, lodging, and gasoline as a direct result of the many confirmation shows licenced by the American Kennel Club that are going on nationwide, on any given weekend. Dog fanciers like to call this "the sport of purebred dogs."

The sport of purebred dogs, or "dog shows," and the contribution to oureconomy that comes alongside it, could not exist without canine animalhusbandry. In order to have an animal that is competitive in said events, theremust exist a "show breeder" somewhere who uses their knowledge of caninegenotype, phenotype, and their years of practical experience in showing andbreeding dogs, to produce a dog that represents a good example of its respectivebreed as defined by that breed's "breed standard."

Although there are exceptions to every rule, the endeavor of producinga good show dog is seldom a profitable one. Factor in the expenses related toshowing a dog, and the factors involved in breeding a dog (health testing, studfees, veterinary costs) and most "show breeders" are overjoyed if they breakeven on a litter of puppies. They do what they do out of the natural human lovefor competition, and presumably, a love for and desire to preserve their breedof choice. Never mind the emotional stress often involved in backing up the animals that you have bred for their entire life. This person is what we commonly refer to asa "hobby breeder."

Rare is the ethical "hobby breeder" who makes a profit on theirendeavor. Even rarer still is the commercial kennel who makes arbitrary breedingdecisions (as opposed to informed ones) that has success in the confirmationring. While there are breeders who blur the line between "puppy mill" and "hobbybreeder," for the most part, you have the people who are taking advantage ofdogs for a profit, and you have the people who have a legitimate interest inpurebred dogs and treat theirs well.

In the case of both the Animal Rights movement, and the pet industry,good exists alongside evil. Just like no rational person would be in support ofthe unnecessary torture of laboratory animals for non-medical research, no rational person would be in favor of keeping dogs in squalor in the name of financial gain.

Thus, you have some aspects of the Animal Rights platform that are perfectly logical, and you have some aspects of the pet industry that are perfectly ethical. And then,you have the "grey areas."

On both sides of this equation, there has arisen a subculture that isbound and determined to adhere to an extremist dogma. I have seen Animal Rightsadvocates assassinate the character of anyone who breeds dogs, portraying them as vile, greedy individuals out to make a quick buck. On the other hand, i have seen ANTI- Animal Rights individuals so bound and determined to fight the Animal Rights cause, that they will even defend the "puppy mill" proprietor as a "legitimate business owner." As you can see, dogma comes in many forms, and in any of them, it is a dangerous entity.

Most of your "hobby breeders," that is, people who have a source ofincome BESIDES the dogs, people who do it for the personal glory and/or the loveof their breed, are completely appalled by the plight of the dogs trapped incommercial kennels and puppy mills. If you think a member of PETA hates theproprietors of puppy mills, you should hear how a hobby breeder talks aboutthem.

However, politics makes for strange bedfellows, and lately, it seemsincreasingly likely that dog breeders of any scope are going to have to unite tofight to defend their right to continue breeding dogs. Ironic, considering it isthe commercial breeders and the puppy mills who gave rise to the petoverpopulation crisis that has allowed the Animal Rights movement to achieve thelevel of support it currently enjoys, which in turn, has put the existence ofthe hobby breeder in such peril.

However, while commercial kennels and puppy mills are, by consensus,abhorrent entities, their actions, despicable as they may be, do not impede orinterfere with the activities of hobby breeders. The same cannot be said for theAnimal Rights movement. So, for the moment, the hobby breeders and thecommercial breeders would appear to have a common enemy.

How did this come to pass? Suffice it to say that agribusiness is anincredibly powerful, entrenched industry that is not going away any time soon.Even the almighty PETA will never amount to more than a fly in the ointment tothe cattle industry.

So the Animal Rights movement, being wise enough to pick their battles, hasseemingly put imposing vegetarianism on all all Americans on the backburner and focused their efforts on what they perceive to be moreattainable goals. Enter the concept of mandatory spay/neuter legislation.

Nationwide, the battle is raging between Animal Rights advocates anddog breeders regarding the issue of mandatory spay- neuter legislation. Suchlegislation recently passed in Dallas, and over a half-dozen houses in Dallaswent on the market that day. This is only a glimpse of the economic damage thatis in store for any municipality that adopts this legislation to the extent thatit impedes the activities of dog breeders.

Indeed, there exists a type of breeder known as a "backyard breeder,"someone who does not licence their dogs, does not provide them withsuitable care, and does not make there breeding decisions based upon theprinciples of responsible animal husbandry. This "backyard breeder" is a small-scale version of the commercial breeder, and these backyard breeders, along withthe animals that they produce, have become a social problem, contributing to petoverpopulation to the extent that legislation is being introduced to curb theiractivity.

In California, where an attempt to pass a statewide mandatoryspay/neuter law was soundly defeated in 2007, the legislation was recentlyre-introduced in a deceptive form that would allow Animal ControlOfficers to issue a citation for having an intact dog, despite their being nolanguage in the bill that actually criminalizes the possession of an intact dog!This is in violation of California's state constitution.

In Chicago, a bill was introduced by Ald. Ed Burke that would require individuals topurchase a "breeding permit" in order to own an intact dog. This additional licencing, and the financial burden that it would impose upon the hobby breeder in Chicago isvery linear to the logical flaw in gun control laws, which is that onlylaw-abiding citizens tend to obey said laws. Your average robber is not going topurchase a concealed weapons permit for his handgun, and your average backyardbreeder is not going to purchase a breeder's licence for his dogs. So in effect, the legislation will only serve as a punitive measure upon those who DO obey the law.

Millions of animals are euthanized annually in this country in sheltersnationwide. Whether or not this is necessary is the subject of fierce debate, with thecity of San Francisco having recently adopted a highly successful "no-kill"strategy, the jury is still out on whether the massive euthanasia of homelesspets is the appropriate response to pet overpopulation. The en vogue strategy ofthe Animal Rights movement is to lay the blame for these deaths at the feet ofthe dog breeder, both commercial and hobby alike, by the logic that every petsold takes a potential home away from a shelter animal. However, not enoughattention is paid to the fact that a shelter dog is not the desire of, nor thesuitable option for every family.

Perhaps a family wants their child to participate in the sport of purebred dogs as aconstructive hobby. Perhaps a family wants a dog with 3 verifiable generationsof health testing behind it. Perhaps a family simply does not feel comfortablebringing a shelter dog of unknown origin and background around their child.

Despite that, the Animal Rights advocates continue to cling to theiroft-told mantra of "don't breed or buy while shelter animals die!" This isanother example of the Animal Rights movement's tendency to use hyperbole and a distortion of the facts in an attempt to mandate other people to adhere to their own ethics.

Shelters do not "have" to euthanize animals. Several workable models of the"no- kill" philosophy exist for the shelter that chooses to implement them.Further, while dog breeders should be morally obligated to stand behind theanimals they have bred, reclaim and re-home them should they end up in a shelter, it is fundamentally un-american to tell a family that their only choice of location to obtain a dog from should be the animal shelter. This is where you leave the black and white of ethical behavior, and venture into that grey area of imposing upon the freedoms of others.

Many of the supporters of a moratorium on dog breeding claim that it isa temporary measure, a "stop-gap" until the plight of homeless animals haseased. Supporters of such a theory are either very foolish for believingthat the government would ever voluntarily return to us a right that wevoluntarily surrendered, or they are using the concept of a moratorium to masktheir true agenda, the extinction of the domestic dog.

Because you see, if every dog or cat in America were spayed and neutered tomorrow, as is the stated goal of the Animal Rights movement, it would, by the very laws of biology, then be physically impossible for those animals to produce a subsequent generation of pets. Which directly equates to there being NO MORE pets, 20 years from now. This is the extinction of the domestic dog that was referred to earlier. This is the "dirty little secret" of the Animal Rights movement.

The cold hard fact of the matter is, that the United States Departmentof Agriculture has failed miserably to enforce laws already on the booksregarding the welfare of animals in commercial kennels. Instead of lobbyingpoliticians to draft new legislation that is punitive to the hobby breeder, whyhave the Animal Rights advocates not focused their tremendous financialresources on getting the government to enforce laws that are already on thebooks regarding commercial kennels that have been ignored for decades?

Could it be that the actual goal of PETA is not to improve thetreatment of animals, but to eradicate pet animal ownership?

So then, what is to be done? Is it possible to end the cycle of crueltyand greed that is the commercial kennel, without embarking upon a slippery slopethat erodes the rights of ANY American to own and breed a dog? Should everyadvocate of Animal Rights be written off due to their irrational position on the dogbreeding issue? Is there any compromise to be had? Should we, as hobby breeders,choose the lesser of two evils, and stand shoulder to shoulder with the commercial kennel industry in defense of our right to continue to own and breed our dogs?

There are no easy answers. However, if we continue upon our currentcourse, make no mistake, we will wake up one day a couple decades from now, lookaround, and wonder where our best friend went. And if that day should come topass, George Washington, the father of our country and an an accomplished dogbreeder who kept immaculate records, will look down upon us in sorrow, andwonder how we let it happen.

We have done quite enough talking. The time for action is now.Californians, please urge your state representative to vote no on AB 1634.Chicagoans, give Ed Burke's office a phone call. Dallas- you're screwed.Sorry. Sell your house and send a letter to your local chamber of commerceexplaining exactly why you did so.

AUTHOR'S NOTE:This article was the result of weeks of interaction with people on all sides of the issue. I attempted to be as objective as possible. Having said that, I AM a dog breeder. I AM against mandatory spay/neuter legislation and I work vigorously to oppose it.And further, allow me to say with no confusion, to any Animal Rights activists who may be reading... As long as the 2nd amendment is still in effect, you will get my dogs' reproductive organs when you pry them from my COLD DEAD HANDS.Seriously- come try to "liberate" my dogs from the "evils" of myownership. You WILL be leaving on a stretcher. Church.

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

IF you were a child 50 years ago you spent your summers outside, sometimes from dawn to dusk and you:

Rode a bike

Climbed trees and built tree houses

Went swimming/wading in the local creek

Played on some great playground equipment (who remembers the maypole, the merry-go-round where a couple of big kids had to run really fast to get it started and then you all kept it going by leaning in and out or the climbing ladders or a whole host of other pieces of equipment that no longer exist.

Collected butterflies, lightening bugs, June bugs, tadpoles And a host of other activities that required you to be able run, jump, climb, twist, turn and deal with the occasional scrapped knee/elbow/sprain/bruise or even broken bone.

You also did yard and garden work (unless you live in the city and didn't get shipped off to the grandparents) You learn how to handle all your body parts.

IF you were a child 40 years ago you

spent your summers outside/inside, but rare was the day spent from dawn to dusk outside doing stuff.

However, you probably still managed to

Ride a bike

Climb a few trees, no tree houses allowed

Went swimming, but a the local community pool/no wading in the creek because it was now an encased drainage ditch and fenced off

Played at the playground, but most of the really good playground equipment had been replaced with "safe" and non-challenging items

Didn't do much collecting of anything insect-wise for one or more of several political reasons

May or may not have learned how to jump rope, play Four-Square, hopscotch, kick the can

May have been enrolled in adult supervised team sports

Did yard work and/or worked in a garden, but only if you lived in the country

You didn't have as much of a chance to learn how to really handle all your body parts, but at least there was still some effort being made.

IF you were a child 30 years ago you spent your summers

Inside/outside and were only outside for fairly short periods of time.

You might know how to ride a bike.

You most likely never climbed a tree.

If you went swimming at all it was at the community center and as a part of a swimming class or swim team

Were afraid of insects

Never played an outside game that didn't include adult supervision, lots of protective gear and a strict schedule

Played video games at the local video game parlor

Were encouraged to engage in far fewer physical activities of any sort

IF you were a child 20 years ago you spent your summers

Inside and only went outside to get from one place to another.

Once in a great while you spend a couple of hours outside.

You might learn to skateboard or use in line skates, bikes were optional

Swimming optional

Games requiring you to be outside...optional

Insects, birds, snakes, turtles, tadpoles and most dogs and cats were not things you willingly came in contact with.

Someone drove you to all your activities, most of which were done in clean, air-conditioned buildings with you under close adult supervision and wearing all sorts of padding and safety gear

all those skinned knees would probably cause arthritis

Video games were the physical activity of choice

IF you were a child 10 years ago you spent your summers

Inside

Someone always drove you from place to place

Bikes, skateboards, in line skates were too dangerous

Trees are dangerous

Insects, birds, snakes, turtles, tadpoles and most dogs and cats are dangerous

Everything you will ever need to know you can learn on a computer.

Soon there will no longer be a need to walk, much less run.

And that is why I say people under the age of 50 have to be taught how to handle their own bodies before they can even begin to have a prayer of being successful with this four-legged creature known as dog.

Right now, on the other side of my tall fence on two sides is an apartment complex. It's been there for about 30 years. Thirty years ago, there were children outside playing in the summer. I know there are children living there. I see them in the early morning as they are being hustled into cars to go to ??? And I see them in the evening when they are brought home. I see the school bus that picks them up during the school year.

These children are NEVER, EVER outside to play or do anything other than get into or out of a car. They are NOT learning how to walk, run, fall, deal with a scrapped knee or elbow or a host of other things that truly are necessary for healthy growth and development. What I hear from the kids who come to me is that all their friends think they are really strange because they go to "this place" where they are around dangerous beasts, dangerous insects, turtles, trees that need climbing. They get scraped knees, elbows, stings. They get hot, dirty, wet, and according to their parents smelly.

They are the lucky ones.

At 13 they are falling over their own feet, by 16 they move with the smooth grace of a healthy youngster. It is extremely obvious right now because I have three here with me. Three who have learned or are learning how to move and handle themselves and I also have two who come with a parent to take lessons. Those two are clumsy, jerky, and clueless. They hate being outside. They whine about the bugs. They are afraid of the other dogs.

They can't even run without herky-jerky, elbows flapping, toes pointed like a duck movement. Harsh assessment? Yep. Honest assessment? Yep. Will they get better? Doubtful. Why? Because their parents aren't one bit better and are far too worried about the dangers of scraped knees or elbows. They are bloody well learning how to be a great computer software accessory, but are they learning how to be human?

A slightly different version of this started out as an email post and after some thought I decided it really needed to become a part of my blog. More on the subject later.

Wednesday, July 02, 2008

Little by little I am starting to see some progress with the ears up business. This morning I switched to a verbal bridge to keep the ears up for a longer period of time. I'm now requiring her to keep them up while changing from a stand to a sit and then back to a stand. Considering how much effort that is appearing to take on her part, I'm going to hold at this level for a couple of days.

One of the things on my list of to do's is getting the ears up position tied to a camera. That way when she sees a camera pointing in her direction she will immediately put those ears all the way up. In thinking back I seem to remember we spent one entire summer teaching Charity to put her ears up and always "pose" whenever she saw a camera pointed in her direction. Don't have a clue as to why I forgot that part, but I sure did.

If Sanity is steady enough with the positions and ears I'm going to try adding the camera to the mix on Friday. So now I have a specific goal to reach.

Normally Sanity and I go out on Tuesdays just so I can do that nail thing I insist is necessary for me to maintain some sort of mental health. However, the normal schedule of events was switched around a bit and this week we went on that jaunt today.

This is what things look like at the nail shop:

"Hi! Good to see you. With the Fourth of July almost on us, I think I'd like to go red this week." "That's the red I had in mind." "Fine, I'll just need you to put your paw right here." "Keep it to color only, no grinding. That part got taken care of at home. You know I don't like to sit in this chair overly long."

And this is what the finished product looks like for this week. Have a happy and safe Fourth of July!!!!!

6. Transfer enforcement of animal welfare legislation away from the Department of Agriculture

7. Eliminate fur ranching and the use of furs.

8. Prohibit hunting, trapping and fishing.

9. End the international trade in wildlife goods

10. Stop any further breeding of companion animals, including purebred dogs and cats. Spaying and neutering should be subsidized by state and municipal governments. Abolish commerce in animals for the pet trade.

11. End the use of animals in entertainment and sports.

12. Prohibit the genetic manipulation of species.

NOTE: This was written in 1987, long before genetic engineering and cloning. In this context, “genetic manipulation” means selective breeding”